The United States has been a heavily involved in Latin American affairs for a long time, and there is great controversy surrounding how good of a neighbor we have been. As the “Colossus of the North”, this country holds enormous power. The question is; have we used our power for good or for evil? At times, we have been generous to Latin American countries. We returned the Panama Canal to the Panamanians and created free trade with Mexico through NAFTA. However, the negative impact we have had outweighs the good. Time after time, the United States has put dictators into Latin American countries out of the fear of growing communism. We have meddled, taken the situations of our neighbors into our own hands with force, and vilified them for situations like the drug trade dilemma that are partially at the fault of the United States. Due to the selfish overstepping upon Latin American governments, our discrimination and blame upon immigrants and foreigners as well as patronizing actions like the Cuban embargo and the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, the Colossus of the North has historically been a poor neighbor to Latin American countries. During the Cold War Era, anti-communist countries like the United States took drastic measures to eliminate communism. Tension spread worldwide and a lot of violence sprung from the feud between communist and anti-communist parties. Many Latin American countries in this time were under a communistic rule and the United States did
The Cold War, which took place from 1947 to 1991 had eventually altered the Latin America's relationship with the United States profoundly, as the region became a battleground between two different competing ideological systems which was capitalism and communism. Prior to the Cold War, both economic and geopolitical concerns had motivated United States policy toward Latin America. But, after the lowering of the Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe, George Kennan, the chief architect of American foreign policy towards the Soviet Union, advocated containment to stop the spreading of communism, not just in Europe, but including the countries all around the world. The result was a bipolar world featuring proxy wars fought throughout the Third World by alternates and clients of the two superpowers. Latin American nations are historically considered to be part of "our backyard," who were not permitted to remain neutral as Washington expected the Latin American countries to ally with the United States, while the Soviet Union sought to gain access to what had been an American sphere of influence and after world war II many Latin American countries such as Cuba faced political, economic and social challenges.
The United States has influenced many nations in the world throughout history. Some of the ways the U.S. has been able to dominate poor countries are with military action and corporate activities that allowed the United States to influence their governments. Since the United States extends its power with the previously mentioned methods, it is recognized as an imperialist nation. The United States has specifically demonstrated imperialistic forces in Latin America. The effects that the United States’ imperialism had on Latin American economies and politics were negative since it brought violence and caused the poor to struggle even more. When the United Sates government did not like policies that Latin American presidents were creating, they would take military actions to force American ideologies into Latin American countries’ governments by installing puppets into their governments. Generally, these countries would have flourished economically without the United States, but since the U.S. became involved with the countries’ policies, their economies have weakened because the U.S. wants the benefits of controlling countries’ resources without being responsible for the people who reside there. This pattern of the United States’ imperialistic behavior has been demonstrated many times in Latin America.
Capitalist versus communist countries, i.e. the Western Bloc versus the Eastern Bloc were linking to the events dominating the politics of the world the Cold War. In the aftermath of World War II, the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union governed the tension surrounding communist growth and fears. These two nations had become the new superpowers, with the communist Soviet Union heading an ‘Eastern Bloc’ of countries and the capitalist United States heading a ‘Western Bloc’. In 1947, the United States declared a new policy to check the growing power of communism; ‘to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation [complete control] by armed minorities or by outside pressure’. The conflict between the Eastern and Western blocs became known as the Cold War. It centred
The cold war has caused many changes between Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Some of these changes were good such as the belief of freedom being spread, but a few of these changes were pretty bad such as many friends and families being lost due to being a
During the Cold War, the United States was worry of the threat of international Communism. The fear of Communism spreading was the excuse they gave to assassinated presidents in Latin America countries that had an inclination
When Fidel Castro took over Cuba by means of a revolution, he quickly established his government as the first openly Communist government in the western hemisphere. He petitioned the Soviet Union for aid, which was cheerfully given him. These events went against our current policies, as well as the Monroe Doctrine, which established us as the police force of the western hemisphere. Ninety miles away from the greatest bastion of Capitalism was now residing its greatest foe. This tense situation was brought to a boiling point by the arrival of
The motivation behind US endeavors during the Cold War was to interfere with Latin American countries politically to counter the spread of communist ideologies that were seen by the US as being directly opposed to its economic and philosophical interests. The US’ economic interests were spread and consolidated through corporations operating within Latin America such as Alcoa, United Fruit, and others. It is through these corporate interests, which were under threat of nationalizion in their respective countries by leftist governments taking hold, that the US justified much of its involvement toppling governments in the region.
The United States and the Soviet Union competed against each other during the Cold War in the second half of the 20th Century like a chess game, with the world as their chessboard and countries as pawns in their game. For the Russians, a critical part of the chessboard was Cuba and Latin America. The Russians believed that if they could align themselves with countries in the western hemisphere, America’s “backyard”, it would help the Soviet Union counter the strong political influence and military presence America had in Europe, which made the Russians feel threatened. The Soviet Union tried to align itself politically, militarily, and economically with as many Latin American countries as it could. In
During the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the United States was the most dominant power in the Western Hemisphere. European nations conceded to the United States their right of any intervention in the Western Hemisphere and allowed the United States to do whatever they wanted. The United States took this newly bestowed power and abused it. The United States intervened in many Latin American countries and imposed their policies on to these countries against their will. A perfect example of this aggression is what occurred in the Dominican Republic in 1904. The United States intervened in this sovereign nation and took control of their economy and custom houses. A memorandum from Francis B. Loomis, the United States Assistant
When looking at the history between the United States and Latin America, you see many interactions between them, all that aided the relationship that they have today. Despite that the United States and Latin America are in the same part of the world, the beliefs in which they govern may differ. This difference has often been seen playing a major role in the disputes that have occurred in past. The United States and Latin America have faced many social, economical and governing barriers in forming a strong and positive relationship in the early twentieth century, this is due to the differences that the two had between cultures and the constant demand for power. However, the two countries have found ways to meet in the middle of their cultural differences, to form an equally fair relationship.
During the Cold War, the US invaded Latin America, Asia, and partly Europe. They used sneaky methods and propaganda to achieve their goals. At this time, in the Cold War, they were very devious and tactical in their mission. The US foreign Policy at that time was all about defeating Communism and keeping the balance of power in it’s favor but most importantly, for US’s own economic interest.
Under the government of the President James Monroe in 1822, U.S opened up relations with Colombia; with a strategical interest for both nations. The agreements were based in expanding commercial relations and strengthen amity. However, U.S relations with Colombia took a different turn as a result of a new era Colombia’s civil war and drug trafficking . The interest of improve the foreign policy and the security of both countries; In order to maintain the U.S relations with Colombia, an analysis of the conflict in Colombia has to be made to protect the U.S national interest.
Mexico is one of the most populated and industrialized of the third world nations, yet it remains very impoverished in comparison to it’s northern neighbor. Recently Mexico has been the third largest trading partner of the United States, has become an important exporter of petroleum and plays a pivotal role in the politics of the region. Yet Mexico is frequently treated with neglect and misunderstanding by the United States. This treatment is why Mexico is hesitant about United States influence and investment in Mexico. While many foreign countries acknowledge the United States as a
Galeano portrays this moment in Latin American history as the instant U.S investors took control over the industries. He details the dangers they went through when producing one item to export for the benefit of foreigners, and how they later imported the processed goods from those same foreign countries, injecting money only overseas. The fact that Latin America needed imports to survive initiated the imperial link the U.S has upon it. As stated by Galeano, “The growing dependence on foreign supplies produces the growing identification of the interest of U.S. capitalists operating in Latin America with U.S. national security”11, bluntly showing the relationship between the United States and Latin America. “With petroleum, as with coffee or meat, rich countries profit more from the work of consuming it than do poor countries from the work of producing it”12. Because profit was not being retained in the Latin American countries, nationalization of the industries became of importance. The United States offered intervention in order to protect everyone’s interests with the proposal of free trade, but this was no more than another manipulation to continue having power over Latin America and its resources: “Latin America’s big ports, through which the wealth of its soil and subsoil passed en route to distant centers of power, were being built as instruments of the conquest and domination of the countries to which they belonged, and as conduits
The lectures in class this week and the article “10 of the Most Lethal CIA Interventions in Latin America” by Olivier Acuña has opened my eyes to the U.S.’s international political connections. The U.S. has proved throughout history to be self serving and has proven to intervene in nations that will lead to its own economic and political advantages. I find it unfortunate that the CIA and American government tries to pride itself on our democratic system, but will support corrupt dictators and absolute rulers